CENTRALITY OF ITALY IN THE MEDITERRANEAN
MIGRATION SYSTEM: ASPECTS OF FOREIGNERS’ PRESENCE
1Stefania Girone, Sabin Dragulin, Sara Grubanov-Bošković
1. Premises
Nowadays the Mediterranean confirms itself, much more significantly than in the past, as a place where considerable migration flows take place as well as a geographical area that holds together emigration countries but also immigration and transit countries.
There is a more widespread perception of being part of a World in constant motion whose actors are being driven by factors of different nature, all of which linked by a common cause: the desire – and in some cases the need – to find elsewhere better life conditions2. In this sense, the area of the Mediterranean Basin represents a case of high interest since it constitutes, together with North America (USA and Canada), one the main areas of attraction for long-range as well as short and medium range flows that originate, mostly, from the areas commonly defined as developing countries.
The end of the Seventies, following the oil crisis (1973), triggered a period of recession which induced all developed countries to reassess their economic strategies, generating a complete transformation of the global economy, including the Euro-Mediterranean one. In this context, a new phase of the Mediterranean migration process has unfolded bringing, among others, changes regarding the direction of the flows, set off by the adoption of “stop” policies by the European Governments (such as France and UK) as a restrictive measure to the foreign labour force demand. This type of policy, set up in order to stop migration flows
1This work originates from the research activities in the topic of demographic dynamics and international migration in the Mediterranean Basin and, in particular, it refers to two most recent research programs on these issues:
I) “Determinanti e conseguenze socio-economiche della mobilità territoriale delle popolazioni in ambito intermediterraneo: il caso italiano”, financed by the Istituto di Studi Politici San Pio V and under scientific coordination of Luigi Di Comite and Stefania Girone (2013-14);
II) “Dinamiche ed equilibri demo-economici nel continente africano: implicazioni sulla presenza straniera in Italia”, financed by the University of Bari and under scientific coordination of Luigi Di Comite (2013-14). 2Di Comite L., Girone S., Galizia F. 2012. La popolazione. Geopolitica delle migrazioni, in Malanima P. /eds/,
originating from poor countries, has had an effect to deviate these flows toward countries where the access would have been easier. It is at this moment that countries like Italy and Spain, traditionally countries of origin of migrants, first became countries of transit and then destination countries for migrants: as a matter of fact, given the geographical proximity and their permeability, due to the lack of adequate policies and laws on migration issues, these countries were initially seen by migrants as transit areas only on their route to economically stronger areas3.
What is more, the official policy of closure adopted in relation to foreign workers along with the simplicity of recruiting the labour force illegally in the Southern Mediterranean has fomented a growing illegal migration leading to additional restrictive measures in the issue of immigration.
During the ‘70s and the ‘80s Tunisia and Morocco were the countries that had contributed mostly in shaping the flows of immigrants directed to the new Mediterranean countries of immigration. The situation partially changed after 1989 when, following the fall of Berlin wall, the (exit) boarders of many former URSS countries opened and set new East-West migration flows in motion.
In Italy, the North African immigration became gradually accompanied by the Albanian one and later by inflows of workers from Former Yugoslav republics4, Romania, Ukraine, etc. In such a frame of reference, it is understandable why the Italian state has been called up to cover a crucial role in the Mediterranean migration network and why in the last thirty years it hosted an amount of foreigners that increased remarkably reaching, at the end of the 21st century, a value of almost 4 thousand units5.Therefore the current levels of foreigners’ presence in Italy have been shaped, since the beginning of the 90s, by different type of flows. Such as, in specific, the South-North flows (the oldest ones), that essentially take place within the Mediterranean and regard mainly Africa, considered both as a whole as well as in its northern and Mediterranean part; the short/medium-range East-West flows that concern largely the Balkans (Romania, Albania, entire Former Yugoslavia, Moldova) and also Poland and Ukraine; the long-range East-West flows pertaining mainly to the Philippines, India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka; and finally those originating from Lain America – directed mainly to Spain, and then Italy – that concern in particular Peru and Ecuador.
3Pace G. /eds./. 2003. Economie Mediterranee. Rapporto 2003, Economia e storia delle società mediterranee n. 3, Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, Naples.
4
Pugliese E. 2001. Migrazioni e mediterraneo, in Aymard M., Barca F. /eds./, Conflitti, migrazioni e diritti dell’uomo. Il Mezzogiorno laboratorio di un’identità mediterranea, Arela, Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, Rubbettino.
5Girone S., Lollo G. 2011. Las migraciones de tránsito: Estrecho de Gibraltar vs Canal de Sicilia, Investigaciones Geográficas, n. 54, Instituto de Geografía de la Universidad de Alicante, Enero-Abril.
Given these premises, the focus in the following paragraphs will be put both on the evolution of foreigners’ presence in Italy in light of past and recent census surveys as well as on nationalities that are mostly represented in the country, relating it to the demographic and socio-economic context. In order to do so, we will use the existing official sources on the topic of foreigners, i.e. the Population and Household Census (Istat), the Survey on non-Italian pupils (Ministry of Education, Universities and Research), labour force surveys (Rcfl, Istat) and, lastly, surveys on inmates (Ministry of Justice).
2. Presence of foreigners through the lens of censuses6
The census tool, which has allowed us to create the time series of foreigners’ presence between 1981 and 2011, has highlighted its considerable increase especially in regards to the last two surveys. As a matter of fact, it is possible to clearly estimate, from the Table 1, how the share of foreigners per 1000 surveyed, increased between the first and the last considered census, going from 3.7‰ to 67.8‰, with the variation rate that was equal to 68.8% between 1981 and 1991 and got to 274.8% in the last census interval.
Hence, in the census interval 1991-2001 our attention is drawn in particular to the pace of increase of foreigners which became ever more intensified.
Between 2001 and 2011, despite the fact that foreign population continued to increase, it underwent a modest deceleration by recording a variation of 201.7%.
Table 1 – Foreigners in Italy according to last censuses. Census year Foreigners
in a.v.
Foreigners per 1,000 surveyed
% variation with respect to the previous census
1981 210,937 3.7 -
1991 356,159 6.3 68.8
2001 1,334,889 23.4 274.8
2011 4,027,627 67.8 201.7
Source: authors’ processing based on Istat data (various years).
There has clearly been a sort of a demographic revolution in the Italian migration scenario over these three decades, not only because it went from recording two hundred thousand of foreigners in 1981 to exceeding four millions in
6Girone S. 2014. La presenza maghrebina in Italia. Research paper elaborated within the research program “Determinanti e conseguenze socio-economiche della mobilità territoriale delle popolazioni in ambito intermediterraneo: il caso italiano”, financed by the Istituto di Studi Politici San Pio V.
2011, but also and foremost in view of a different “ethnic framework” that can be derived from data reported in the Table 2.
In the case of 1981 census all top five nationalities belonged to a group of the so called developed countries and it was necessary to scroll down to the sixth place to come across Tunisia; ten years after Morocco and Tunisia appeared among the top five positions; in 2001 among the top seven positions there were Morocco, Albania, Romania, the Philippines, Yugoslavia, Tunisia and China and none of these countries was part of highly developed countries; finally, today none of the developed countries results among the first fifteen positions.
In less than three decades, thus, the foreign presence evolved from having modest dimensions with the prevalence of the highly developed European countries and the USA to another type in which prevails the presence originating mainly from South-North and East-West flows.
Moreover, currently there has been a trend of a progressive extension of predominance of top ranked nationalities (Romania, Albania, Morocco, China and Ukraine) that alone absorb more than 50.0% of the total number of foreigners surveyed in our country7.
Table 2 – Top 15 nationalities, EU and non-EU, represented in Italy according to the last
census surveys (percentage).
Country of citizen. 1981 Country of citizenship 1991 Country of citizenship 2001 Country of citizenship 2011 France 10.9 Morocco 11.2 Morocco 13.5 Romania 20.5 USA 8.8 Germany 6.4 Albania 13.0 Albania 11.3 Switzerl. 8.2 Yugoslavia 4.8 Romania 5.6 Morocco 10.1 F.R.G. 7.0 Tunisia 4.7 Philippines 4.0 China 4.8 UK 5.3 France 4.4 Yugoslavia 3.7 Ukraine 4.4 Tunisia 3.9 Philippines 4.3 Tunisia 3.6 Philippines 3.2
Belgium 3.3 USA 4.2 China 3.5 Moldova 3.2
Greece 2.9 UK 3.9 Germany 2.6 India 2.9
Yugosl. 2.4 Senegal 3.0 Senegal 2.3 Peru 2.3
Iran 1.9 Albania 3.0 Peru 2.2 Poland 2.1
Austria 1.8 Switzerl. 2.9 France 2.2 Tunisia 2.1 Libya 1.6 Romania 2.7 Macedon. 2.1 Ecuador 2.0
Canada 1.6 Egypt 2.7 Egypt 2.0 Banglad. 2.0
Venezuela 1.6 China 2.1 Poland 2.0 Macedon. 1.8 Argentina 1.5 Argentina 2.1 India 2.0 Senegal 1.8
Tot.(a. v.) 210,937 356,159 1,334,889 4,027,627
Source: authors’ processing based on Istat data (various years).
7Di Comite L. 2011. From Emigration to Immigration: the Italian Experience, Rivista Italiana di Economia, Demografia e Statistica, n. 2.
Over census periods the non-EU presence has gained an increasingly larger size than the EU one: in fact, in 2011 it was equivalent to 72.5% of total foreigners and 1.9% of the total population – Italian and foreign together – surveyed in Italy.
The entire non-EU contingent results essentially formed of Europeans, Africans and Asians (17.7%), while on the other hand there is a low share of Americans and a completely marginal share of migrants from Oceania.
3. Demographic profile of foreigners in Italy: specific case of three mostly represented nationalities
In order to initially identify the most important homogeneities and/or heterogeneities among various nationalities represented, it is necessary first to draw a structural demographic profile of foreigners currently present in Italy.
The most widely used operative tool in studies of the structural state of any given population is the age pyramid and accordingly, in our specific case, it has been retained that a construction of a triple pyramid related to three nationalities mostly represented in Italy (Romania, Albania and Morocco) could provide an instrument of immediate comparison
Therefore, by observing the three pyramidal profiles (Figure 1) one can easily noticed how the structures of the Romanian, Albanian and Moroccan population differ, albeit modestly in certain traits, in terms of age and sex: the first one appears as a stretched “spin top-shape model”, i.e. large in the central age groups and narrow at the two opposite ends; the second one is the one that among those considered tends to be mostly similar to the pyramidal form of the entire foreign population seen together, presenting a base and central age groups moderately extended with the exception of the highest age groups for which the Albanians, in comparison to the total of foreigners, have slightly lower shares; while the third one is particularly emblematic of the transitional state, which is still in course, proper to Morocco since it appears as a funnel shape “model” with a base significantly large and narrow vertex, effect of a clear growing population.
In the near future the age structure of foreigners and in particular the one concerning Romanians, Albanians and also Moroccans, that by now claim prolonged periods of stay (decennial and sometimes even bidecennial) on the Italian soil, should uniform and thus approach, before other nationalities, the pyramidal state that is proper to the Italian population: the base will tend to narrow down while the opposite effect will concern central age groups and foremost those above 65 years of age that will go extending as a clear effect of the increase in the mean age as well as the effect of the demographic ageing that has been affecting, with different ways and rates, all highly developed populations.
Figure 1 – Age pyramids related to foreigners and the top three nationalities present in
Italy according to the 2011 census (percentages).
Source: authors’ processing based on Istat data (2011 Census).
At this point, the employment of some common indicators (Table 3) is not only useful but also necessary to complete what has already been said regarding the age structure of considered foreign populations.
The analysis of gender composition, carried out using the masculinity ratio (known as sex ratio), reveals a higher incidence of women in comparison to men when considering the entire foreign population (Rm = 87.6%) and it appears even more pronounced for Romanians (Rm = 76.7%), while on the contrary Moroccans as well as Albanians register values of Rm equal to 118.1% and 109.2% respectively.
The mean age of the Moroccan population is 28.7 years and, in comparison to the entire foreigner population (31.5) and, in specific, to Romanians (30.8) and Albanians (30.2), it results to be the youngest one.
The generally marginal presence of the over60 population – and in the case of Romanians (0.6%) almost non-existing – comes along with a share of under18 that is all but insignificant, especially for Moroccans that register the highest share (31.1%) among the main immigrant groups and consequently higher even than the share of minors of the entire immigrant population (23.4%).
Reading it through dynamic lens, it is quite obvious that in opposition to an undisputedly regressive type of the Italian population, since the amount of younger population is lower than one of the older, the population of foreigners is evolving according to a progressive type of a trend, having shares of youth abundantly higher in comparison to scarce shares of over60.
Table 3 – Indicators of age structure related to the foreign population and main immigrant
nationalities according to the 2011 census (percentages and completed age).
Citizenship Rm Under18 Over60 Mean age Main regions
Romania 76.7 20.3 0.6 30.8 Lazio 18.1%
Albania 109.2 27.6 4.8 30.2 Lombardy 21.0%
Morocco 118.1 31.1 2.8 28.7 Lombardy 24.2%
Foreigners 87.6 23.4 2.3 31.5 Lombardy 23.5%
Source: authors’ processing based on Istat data (2011 Census).
4. Concentration and distribution of foreigners on the territory
The territorial distribution of foreigners confirms one typical trait of the Italian migration phenomenon: the foreign population has always been distributed on the Italian soil in a highly irregular way and it holds both for the entire foreign population as well as for single groups distinguished by nationality.
Foreigners reside primarily in Northern and Central Italian regions and only in minor share in the South and on the Islands8. According to the last census data, Lombardy results as the leading region with 23.5%; followed at a distance by Veneto (11.4%) and Emilia Romagna (11.2%).
Therefore, the regions of Northern Italy are at the top of the classification of regions with the highest share of foreigners and it is necessary to go to the 4th rank to trace one Central region (Lazio: 10.6%) and to go further down to the 7th place to trace the Southern one (Campania: 3.7%).
More specifically, the following can be highlighted in reference to three main nationalities considered (Figure 2):
a) Romanians with 58.3% are divided between Lazio (18.1%), Piedmont (14.8%), Lombardy (14.4) and Veneto (11.0%);
b) Albanians with 57.4% are concentrated in Lombardy (21.0%), Tuscany (14.2%), Emilia Romagna (12.7%) and Piedmont (9.5%);
c) Moroccans with 67.0% are distributed between Lombardy (24.2%), Emilia Romagna (15.8%), Piedmont (14.1%) and Veneto (12.9%).
8Over the last decade a major number of foreigners has poured into and settled in Southern regions, however this increase has not had enough impact yet to change the consolidated and traditional territorial scenario.
Figure 2 – Territorial distribution of Romanians, Albanians and Moroccans according to
the 2011 census (percentages).
Source: authors’ processing based on Istat data (2011 Census).
Besides Lombardy and Piedmont that remain a constant for all three nationalities, there are no Southern Italian regions among areas with the highest share of Romanians, Albanians and Moroccans, while only two regions appear in the case of the Central, namely Tuscany for Albanians and Lazio for Romanians.
Romania, Albania and Morocco come out as the top three nationalities mostly represented in each Italian region – often in a different order between regions – in 12 cases out of 20. So in only eight regions besides Romanians, Albanians and Moroccans there can be found: Serbs in the 3rd position in Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Ecuadorians ranked as the 1st in Liguria, Chinese as 3rd in Tuscany and Sardinia,
Filipinos and Poles at the 2nd and 3rd rank respectively in Lazio, Ukrainians as 1st in Campania and as 3rd in Calabria and, finally, Tunisians as 2nd in Sicily (Table 4).
Table 4 – Regional distribution of the three mostly represented nationalities in Italy
according to the 2011 census.
Region First 3 main countries
1st Country 2nd Country 3rd Country
Piedmont Romania Morocco Albania
Valle d'Aosta Morocco Romania Albania
Lombardy Romania Morocco Albania
Trentino-Alto Adige Albania Romania Morocco
Veneto Romania Morocco Albania
Friuli-Venezia Giulia Romania Albania Serbia
Liguria Ecuador Albania Romania
Emilia-Romagna Morocco Romania Albania
Tuscany Romania Albania China
Umbria Romania Albania Morocco
Marche Romania Albania Morocco
Lazio Romania Philippines Poland
Abruzzo Romania Albania Morocco
Molise Romania Morocco Albania
Campania Ukraine Romania Morocco
Apulia Albania Romania Morocco
Basilicata Romania Albania Morocco
Calabria Romania Morocco Ukraine
Sicily Romania Tunisia Morocco
Sardinia Romania Morocco China
Italy Romania Albania Morocco
Source: authors’ processing based on Istat data (2011 Census).
Among the top five municipalities in which the nationalities of our interest result mostly concentrated there are all the cities of Northern Italy (Bologna, Genoa, Milan, Padua, Turin, and Verona), except for two Central Italy municipalities (Florence and Rome). Whereas the capital city is present in all three rankings, Florence appears relevant only in the Albanian ranking as the last position (Table 5).
Table 5 – Distribution of the three mostly represented nationalities in Italy among their
prime municipalities of residence according to the 2011 census.
Municipality of residence
Romania Albania Morocco
Rome Rome Turin
Turin Turin Milan
Milan Genoa Rome
Padua Milan Genoa
Verona Florence Bologna
Source: authors’ processing based on Istat data (2011 Census).
5. Socio-economic aspects: school, work and detention
Within the Italian scholastic system, the increase of foreign students is largely attributed to the raise of enrolments registered in the past years.
According to the last available data of Education, Universities and Research Ministry for the SY 2012/2013, the number of non-Italian students has reached 800 thousand units that correspond to a share equal to 8.8% of the total amount of students enrolled in the Italian schools9. Also, there is a considerable share of “second generation” students, i.e. those born in Italy, which went significantly increasing over the last years and currently represents 47.2% of the total number of non-Italian students in the Italian school system.
Romanian students (18.9%) together with Albanian (13.3%) and Moroccan ones (12.5%) are the most numerous ones, representing together 44.7% of non-Italian enrolled students. Other nationalities register a share lower than 5.0%.
Over the last two decades, from 1990/91 school year to 2012/13, the share of Romanians showed a tendency of constant and almost systematical raise, whereas the share of Albanians and Moroccans has underwent with the new millennium a modest contraction with not so regular trends, especially in the Albanian case (Figure 3). Among educational stages, the mostly attended stage by non-Italian students is the primary school, followed by the upper secondary school (22.3%), the lower secondary school (21.7%) and, finally, the preschool (20.9%). In comparison to the total of non-Italian students, Romanians, Albanians and Moroccans ones are also the most numerous in the primary school, but in contrast the Romanians and Moroccans result less numerous in the upper secondary school, whilst Albanians in the lower secondary school (Figure 4).
9Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca. 2014. Alunni con cittadinanza non italiana.
Figure 3 – Non-Italian students in the Italian school system (main 3 citizenships), SY
1990/1991 – 2012/2013 (percentages).
Source: authors’ processing based on Miur data, 2013.
Figure 4 – Non-Italian students in the Italian school system according to the educational
stages, SY 2012/2013 (percentages).
Source: authors’ processing based on Miur data, 2013.
The analysis of the economic context, carried out by using the Istat data on labour force10, has allowed us to evaluate the level of labour participation of foreign population, distinguished by EU and extra-EU, residing on the Italian territory11.
10 Labour force survey micro data (Istat, 2013).
11The data currently available on economic aspects do not allow to carry out an analysis for all the nationalities: they do not include data for EU nationalities and hence, in our specific case, on Romanians.
Over the last years, the economic crisis in Italy has been downsizing employment levels and increasing unemployment. The effects of this economic situation continue to engage also non-Italians that traditionally have been recording higher employment levels than the Italian labour force.
Whilst discussing conditions and employment types, one should bear in mind that only the population that has generally concluded the mandatory school, and thus has an age equal and/or higher than 15 years, is being considered. In reference to the first aspect – employment conditions – it can be notices that among non-Italians the employment rate is assessed at around 60%, while for non-Italians this percentage goes down to around 40%. Albanians and Moroccans register employment rates (50.0% and 46.4% respectively) that are higher than the Italian average, but on the other hand lower that the non-Italian, both EU and extra EU, average (Figure 5).
Figure 5 – Employment rates by nationality (age 15 and above) on 2012.
Source: authors’ processing based on Rcfl micro data (Istat, 2013).
Even though there are no specific data on Romanians for this type of the study, it is sufficient to observe EU foreigners in order to get a clear idea of how the employment levels of the main nationality in Italy should be much higher than those pertinent to Albanians and Moroccans.
In order to have some more specific information about Romanians – together with Albanians and Moroccans – on the subject of employment, this study additionally employed the database extrapolated from the Istat’s survey (“Income
and Living Conditions”) which offers greater details about foreigners by single nationalities12.
The construction of the profiles related to the three examined nationalities – that correspond to three models reported in the table 6 – was carried out by means of a logistic regression analysis that allows confronting odd ratios of being employed while controlling for sex, age, education level, health status and the length of the permanency in Italy.
Accordingly, the multivariate analysis results show that the propensity of being employed is higher for:
a) men rather than for women in all three models, however the gap in favor of men is least marked for Romanians;
b) those aged between 35 and 44, a trend that emerges from all three cases; c) those who have higher education, a trend that is also present in each of the
three models;
d) those who report their health conditions as good, as shown in the model for Albanians and Moroccans13;
e) those who reside in Italy less than 10 years, as indicated for Romanians14. Among the three observed nationalities, Albanians and Moroccans show very similar attitudes in contrast to Romanians that, albeit modestly, appear to distinguish themselves.
In the conclusion of this paper, a study on the detention of foreigners in Italy was held to be of high interest given the particular historical moment characterized by the phenomenon of prison “overcrowding” 15
. According to the data provided by the Amministrazione Penitenziaria di Grazia e Giustizia Department, on March 2013 in 206 Italian prisons there were 140 “caged” per 100 regulatory places.
The Italian penitentiary contingent reveals a consolidated foreign component for years now: 35.6% of detainees in Italian prisons are, in fact, non-Italians.
At regional level (Table 7), as reported by the latest Dap statistics (31st March 2013), the 65,831 units that compose the population of inmates, Italians and foreigners, are largely concentrated in Lombardy (9,289), Lazio (7,231) and Sicily (7.081) that embody together around 50.0% of the national amount of inmates; on other hand, the lowest number is registered in Valle d’Aosta and Trentino Alto
12The survey “Income and Living conditions” was carried out for the first time by the Istat in 2009, following the example of the survey “Income and Living Conditions, Eu-Silc (European Statistics on Income and Living Conditions)”, on a sample of 6,000 families that have at least one foreign family member residing in Italy. 13The variable concerning health conditions is not statistically significant for Romanians.
14The variable concerning the length of residency is not statistically significant for Albanians and Moroccans. 15De Palma F., Girone S. 2014. The Ones "Caged" in Italy: a Focus on Foreigners, Rivista Italiana di Economia, Demografia e Statistica, n.1.
Adige (181 and 280 units respectively) where the share of detainees, generally equal to 1.0%, is basically marginal.
Table 6 – Logistic regression models.
Variables Odd ratios of being employed
Romanians Mod. 1 Albanians Mod. 2 Moroccans Mod. 3 Exp (ß) Exp (ß) Exp (ß) SEX
Female (ref. Male) 0,27*** 0,13*** 0,14*** AGE 25-34 2,56*** 4,89*** 2,94*** 35-44 4,08*** 6,79*** 4,88*** 45+ 3,59*** 1,60** 2,84*** (ref. 15-24) EDUCATION 1,65*** 1,27* 1,46** GENERAL HEALTH
Negative (ref. Positive) 0,94 0,63*** 0,71* RESIDENCY
<10 years (ref. > 10 years) 1,63** 1,15 1,15
Pseudo R2 17,2% 35,8% 35,9%
N 2.092 1.239 1.013
p< 0.05 *; p< 0.01 **; p< 0.001 ***
Source: authors’ processing based on Istat dataset“Reddito e condizione di vita”.
Moreover, by decomposing the detained population into Italians and foreigners, the highest density of Italian inmates is observed in the South of peninsula while for the foreign detainees in the North. Among regions with the bigger amount of Italian detainees there are Campania, Sicily, Lombardy, Lazio, Apulia and Calabria; whilst among those with the higher number of foreigners are Tuscany, Veneto and Emilia Romagna, besides Lombardy, Lazio and Piedmont that are generally “disputed” both by foreigners and Italians.
The “overcrowding” is an unviable condition which, except for Sardinia and Basilicata, affects all Italian regions and it is true even if the national average (139.9%) was to be considered as the reference criterion with only nine regions recording a lower overcrowding index (Is16) than the average. More specifically,
16The condition of “overcrowding” was computed by means of the indicator (I
s=Pd/Cr *100) that expresses the relation between the inmate population and the regulatory capacity of the penitentiary institution under consideration.
61.2% (40,309 units) of the total penitentiary contingent “suffers greatly the overcrowding”, since they are being incorporated in regions with overcrowding levels above the national average17. Also, it is impressive the number of regions with strong foreign connotation: only seven regions (Abruzzo, Basilicata, Calabria, Campania, Molise, Apulia and Sicily) have a share of foreigners lower than the national average (35.6%); and even though in small, in terms of capacity, regions (Valle d’Aosta and Trentino Alto Adige) the incidence of foreigners is remarkable (foreigners compose ¾ of detainees in each region), it is actually in the case of region with large capacities that the phenomenon of “over-representation” of foreigners gains major significance. It is the case of Veneto, Liguria, Friuli Venezia Giulia, Tuscany, Emilia Romagna and Piedmont, where more than 50.0% of the inmate population are foreigners (Table 8 and Figure 5).
Table 7 – Inmates, regulatory capacity and overcrowding of Italian prisons by Region of
detention - March 31st 2013. Regions Number Prisons Standard Capacity Prisoners* Ov Foreigners (%) Total Females Foreigners
Abruzzo 8 1,512 1,860 79 304 123.0 16.3 Apulia 11 2,459 4,078 221 741 165.8 18.2 Basilicata 3 441 441 16 60 100.0 13.6 Calabria 12 2,151 2,879 72 395 133.8 13.7 Campania 17 5,794 8,296 360 981 143.2 11.8 Emilia Romagna 13 2,465 3,631 131 1,871 147.3 51.5 Friuli Venezia Giulia 5 548 838 28 462 152.9 55.1
Lazio 14 4,834 7,231 482 2,974 149.6 41.1 Liguria 7 1,088 1,881 72 1,098 172.9 58.4 Lombardy 19 6,051 9,289 572 4,095 153.5 44.1 Marche 7 777 1,200 35 558 154.4 46.5 Molise 3 391 520 0 63 133.0 12.1 Piedmont 13 3,679 4,979 168 2,497 135.3 50.2 Sardinia 12 2,257 2,010 34 785 89.1 39.1 Sicily 27 5,559 7,081 179 1,279 127.4 18.1 Tuscany 18 3,261 4,124 160 2,225 126.5 54.0
Trentino Alto Adige 2 280 395 22 281 141.1 71.1
Umbria 4 1,332 1,628 72 681 122.2 41.8
Valle d'Aosta 1 181 271 0 199 149.7 73.4
Veneto 10 1,985 3,199 144 1,887 161.2 59.0
Total 206 47,045 65,831 2,847 23,436 139.9 35.6 *The inmates in day-release are totaled in the number of prisoners.
Source: authors’ processing based on DAP data.
17De Palma F., Girone S. 2013. Overcrowding in Italian Jails. A Quantitative Analysis on Foreigners, Polis - Journal of Political Science, Bucharest, October.
Figure 5 – Territorial distribution of the (native and foreign) population detained in the
Italian prisons - March 31st 2013.
Source: authors’ processing based on DAP data.
Moreover, the regional analysis reveals that while there are only two areas (Apulia and Campania) of major suffering for Italian inmates, on other hand there are six regional areas (Liguria, Veneto, Emilia Romagna, Valle d’Aosta, Friuli Venezia Giulia and Trentino Alto Adige) for foreign detainees (Table 8).
It is, however, true that the distress suffered by foreigners in the mentioned regions is less heavy than the one suffered by the Italians in Campania and Apulia. Finally, in Lombardy and Lazio the overcrowding is almost equally relevant among Italians and foreigners.
Table 8 – Inmates in Italian prisons by Regions with great Ov (above national average =
139,9%) - March 31st 2013.
Region Ov
Natives Foreigners Total Units % units % units % Liguria 172.9 783 41.6 1,098 58.4 1,923 100.0 Apulia 165.8 3,337 81.8 741 18.2 4,160 100.0 Veneto 161.2 1,312 41.0 1,887 59.0 3,240 100.0
Marche 154.4 642 53.5 558 46.5 1,254 100.0
Lombardy 153.5 5,194 55.9 4,095 44.1 9,345 100.0 Friuli Venezia Giulia 152.9 376 44.9 462 55.1 883 100.0 Valle d'Aosta 149.7 72 26.6 199 73.4 298 100.0 Lazio 149.6 4,257 58.9 2,974 41.1 7,290 100.0 Emilia Romagna 147.3 1,760 48.5 1,871 51.5 3,679 100.0 Campania 143.2 7,315 88.2 981 11.8 8,384 100.0 Trentino Alto Adige 141.1 114 28.9 281 71.1 424 100.0
Total - 25,162 62.4 15,147 37.6 40,371 100.0
Source: authors’ processing based on DAP data.
Natives < 5.00 5.00 - 10.00 10.01 - 15.00 > 15.00 Foreigners < 5.00 5.00 - 10.00 10.01 - 15.00 > 15.00
Among foreigners caged in Italian prisons, there is a clear prevalence of Africans (49.0% of the total amount of foreign prisoners), most of all coming from the Maghreb (35.8%). They are followed by Europeans, both members of EU (20.7%) and not (19.9%), and then Americans and Asians who certainly report much lower shares (respectively 5.7% and 4.9%) than the former ones. In the above context, it does not go unnoticed the great female percentage among Nigerians, distinctive almost negligible in other African countries18 (Dap, 2013).
The most outstanding nationalities19 among the foreign inmates are the Moroccan (19.0%), the Romanian (15.8%), the Tunisian (12.5%) and the Albanian (12.3%) ones, which all together sum 60.0% of the total, i.e. nearby 14,000 of the whole foreigners housed in Italian prisons.
Those four representative foreign inmates are differently distributed in the Italian territory (Figure 6): a) Moroccan prisoners are mainly concentrated in the area of Lombardy, Tuscany and Piedmont; b) Romanian detainees are greatly located in Lazio, though their lesser extend presence in Lombardy and Piedmont cannot be completely ignored; c) Tunisian inmates are the most spread on land, as they are housed in Tuscany, Emilia Romagna, Lombardy and Veneto; d) the Albanian ones are essentially positioned in Lombardy and Tuscany. Besides, the only Regions gathering significant presence of the four nationalities together (that is, more than 1,000 units) are Lombardy (2,358), Tuscany (1,540), Lazio (1,476), Piedmont (1,439), Veneto (1,262) and Emilia Romagna (1,254).
At this point, in order to deepen the study on the four major foreign nationalities, it has been selected those Regions having the following features in their penitentiary structure: i) a very high overcrowding rate, that is, above the national average (139.9%); ii) a percentage of foreign inmates greater than the national one (35,6%); iii) a considerable prison capacity (above 1,000 regulatory places)20.
18Cfr nota 15.
19Due to scare space available, this paper doesn’t report the table showing the ten most representative foreign nationalities in Italian prisons which, specifically, are: 1) Morocco (19.0%), 2) Romania (15.8%), 3) Tunisia (12.5%), 4) Albania (12.3%), 5) Nigeria (4.3%), 6) Algeria (2.6%), 7) Egypt (2.0%), 8) former Yugoslavia (2.0%), 9) Senegal (1.7%), 10) Bulgaria (1.5%).
20In this regard, three regions (Trentino Alto Adige, Valle d'Aosta and Friuli Venezia Giulia) have been discarded from this analysis as - though having a high overcrowding rate and a great foreign presence -have a small prison capacity, that is, below 1,000 places.
Figure 6 – Territorial distribution of the most outstanding foreign nationalities
(Moroccan, Romanian, Tunisian and Albanian) in Italian prisons - March 31st 2013.
Source: authors’ processing based on DAP data.
By doing so, tables 9a and 9b allow to identify the six Regions (Lombardy, Lazio, Emilia Romagna, Veneto, Liguria and Marche) where major foreign prisoners (Moroccans, Romanians, Tunisians and Albanians) may extremely suffer of “unlivable overcrowding”. More specifically, it comes up that each one of the above Regions: 1. holds a considerable amount of inmates coming from the four foreign countries, aggregates that range from nearby 50.0% in Lazio to 67.0% in Emilia Romagna (Table 9a); 2. likely causes “equal overcrowding distress” to nearby ½ of each foreign group. Basically, since the major foreign presences are
Morocco < 5.00 5.00 - 10.00 10.01 - 15.00 15.01 - 20.00 > 20.00 Romania < 5.00 5.00 - 10.00 10.01 - 15.00 15.01 - 20.00 > 20.00 Tunisia < 5.00 5.00 - 10.00 10.01 - 15.00 15.01 - 20.00 > 20.00 Albania < 5.00 5.00 - 10.00 10.01 - 15.00 15.01 - 20.00 > 20.00
hold by the six Regions at the same percentage (ranging from 52.3% for Moroccans to 54.6 for Romanians), it is certainly fair to say that there may be a kind of “prison unlivable homogeneity” among the four nationalities, yet, even inside each one of them (Table 9b).
Furthermore, table 9a shows that the “overcrowding-suffering” is territorially diversified:
a) most of Moroccans are affected by that phenomenon in Lombardy, Emilia Romagna, Veneto and Liguria;
b) a huge quota of Romanians experiences unlivable conditions in Lazio; c) a large amount of Tunisians has to tolerate living-discomfort in Emilia
Romagna and Veneto, besides, quite as much as Moroccans do in the same Regions;
d) many Albanians undergo same inadequacies in Marche.
Table 9a – Distribution of Moroccans, Romanians, Tunisians and Albanians by Region
with great capacity, Ov and foreign presence - March 31st 2013.
Region A* B** C*** Morocco Rumania Tunisia Albania subtotal rest
for. total for. Lombardy 9,289 153.5 44.1 23.1 14.2 7.9 12.3 57.6 42.4 100.0 Lazio 7,231 149.6 41.1 7.6 26.6 6.3 9.1 49.6 50.4 100.0 E. Romagna 3,631 147.3 51.5 23.4 10.6 21.1 12.0 67.0 33.0 100.0 Veneto 3,199 161.2 59.0 20.1 13.8 18.7 14.3 66.9 33.1 100.0 Liguria 1,881 172.9 58.4 24.8 11.6 15.6 12.5 64.4 35.6 100.0 Marche 1,200 154.4 46.5 14.2 10.4 18.3 23.1 65.9 34.1 100.0 A* Regulatory Capacity - B** Overcrowding rate - C*** Total Foreign inmates/Total inmates (x100).
Source: authors’ processing based on DAP data.
Table 9b – Distribution of Moroccans, Romanians, Tunisians and Albanians by Region
with great capacity, Ov and foreign presence - March 31st 2013.
Region Morocco Romania Tunisia Albania
Lombardy 21.2 15.8 11.1 17.4 Lazio 5.1 21.4 6.4 9.4 Emilia Romagna 9.8 5.4 13.5 7.8 Veneto 8.5 7.1 12.0 9.3 Liguria 6.1 3.4 5.8 4.7 Marche 1.8 1.6 3.5 4.5 Subtotal 52.5 54.6 52.3 53.1 rest of Regions 47.5 45.4 47.7 46.9 Italy 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
In light of the findings that emerged from this last part of the research, it has been retained that the issue of “overcrowding” and “over-representation” of foreigners in Italian prisons constitutes a problem that cannot find sustainable solutions in the short period. The analysis of the “Italian vs. foreign inmate” issue has allowed going beyond the mere Italian connotation by taking a closer look at those who, having the juridical status of “foreigner”, find themselves in a more vulnerable position than the natives.
6. Concluding remarks
This study has allowed us to grasp some of the most important demographic and socio-economic aspects of the foreigners’ presence in Italy in general and in regard to three nationalities (Romanians, Albanians and Moroccans) mostly represented in particular. During some hundred years, from the beginning of the World War I until today, the migration “scenario” of our country inverted: in fact, it went from a situation of a migration deficit of nearly 4 million units, in the period from 1881 until the World War I, to a situation in which it counts a foreign presence somewhat higher than that same value. Therefore, this evolution can be summarized simply by underlining that, in broad terms, the numbers are the same but the sign of the migration balance went from being negative to being positive21.
With a migration process in its consolidation phase, taking on traits of economic and territorial stability of entire and full family nuclei, a phenomenon which in the near future will certainly start gaining major relevance for the entire Italian society is the question of second generations. The integration models of these second generations – that appear to be very delicate since they involve issues that concern ethnic identity of individuals belonging to this particular group – will be heavily conditioned by demographic and socio-economic traits of the family as well as of the ethnic community of origin. Therefore, an in-depth examination of foreign communities today will allow identifying, among others, those aspects that could influence the integration process of second generation of each foreign community, offering this way to policy-makers useful indications on how to develop interventions that could anticipate potential problems and guarantee a virtuous integration and pluriethnic cohabitation22.
21Cfr nota 5.
22Grubanov-Bošković S. 2014. La presenza Albanese in Italia. Research paper elaborated within the research program “Socio-economic determinants and consequences of the territorial mobility of populations in the inter-Mediterranean context: the Italian case”, financed by the Istituto di Studi Politici San Pio V.
Essential literature
DE PALMA F., GIRONE S. 2013. Overcrowding in Italian Jails. A Quantitative
Analysis on Foreigners, Polis - Journal of Political Science, Bucharest, October.
DE PALMA F., GIRONE S. 2014. The Ones "Caged" in Italy: a Focus on
Foreigners, Rivista Italiana di Economia, Demografia e Statistica, n.1.
DI COMITE L. 2011. From Emigration to Immigration: the Italian Experience, Rivista Italiana di Economia, Demografia e Statistica, n. 2.
DI COMITE L., GIRONE S., GALIZIA F. 2012. La popolazione. Geopolitica
delle migrazioni, in Malanima P. /eds/, Rapporto sulle economie del Mediterraneo. Edizione 2012, Bologna, il Mulino.
DRAGULIN S. 2014. La presenza romena in Italia. Research paper elaborated within the research program “Determinanti e conseguenze socio-economiche della mobilità territoriale delle popolazioni in ambito intermediterraneo: il caso italiano”, financed by the Istituto di Studi Politici San Pio V.
GIRONE S., LOLLO G. 2011. Las migraciones de tránsito: Estrecho de Gibraltar
vs Canal de Sicilia, Investigaciones Geográficas, n. 54, Instituto de Geografía de
la Universidad de Alicante, Enero-Abril.
GIRONE S. 2014. La presenza maghrebina in Italia. Research paper elaborated within the research program “Determinanti e conseguenze socio-economiche della mobilità territoriale delle popolazioni in ambito intermediterraneo: il caso italiano”, financed by the Istituto di Studi Politici San Pio V.
GRUBANOV-BOŠKOVIĆ S. 2014. La presenza albanese in Italia. Research paper elaborated within the research program “Determinanti e conseguenze socio-economiche della mobilità territoriale delle popolazioni in ambito intermediterraneo: il caso italiano”, financed by the Istituto di Studi Politici San Pio V.
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MIGRATION (IOM) IN
COLLABORATION WITH GALLUP. 2011. Gallup World Poll: The Many
Faces of Global Migration, n. 43.
ISTAT http://stra-dati.istat.it/, http://dati-censimentopopolazione.istat.it/.
MINISTERO DELL’ISTRUZIONE, DELL’UNIVERSITÀ E DELLA RICERCA. 2014. Alunni con cittadinanza non italiana. L’eterogeneità dei percorsi
scolastici. Rapporto nazionale A.s. 2012/2013, Ismu n.1.
PACE G. eds. 2003. Economie Mediterranee. Rapporto 2003, Economia e storia delle società mediterranee n. 3, Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, Naples.
PUGLIESE E. 2001. Migrazioni e mediterraneo, in Aymard M., Barca F. /eds./.
Conflitti, migrazioni e diritti dell’uomo. Il Mezzogiorno laboratorio di un’identità mediterranea, Arela, Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, Rubbettino.
SUMMARY
Centrality of Italy in the Mediterranean Migration System: Aspects of Foreigners’ Presence
Within the Italian migration scenario, over the last decades, there has been a sort of a demographic revolution, not only because it passed from recording some two hundred thousand of foreigners in 1981 to exceeding four millions in 2011, but also in view of a different “ethnic framework”: in fact, through the 4 censuses the foreign presence evolved from having modest dimensions with the prevalence of the highly developed European countries and the USA to another type in which prevails the presence originating mainly from South-North and East-West flows. In addition, currently there has been a trend of progressive extension of predominance of top ranked nationalities (Romania, Albania, Morocco, China and Ukraine) that alone absorb more than 50.0% of the total number of foreigners surveyed in our country. In this ranking thus dominate Mediterranean migration flows both in South-North direction (Morocco) as well as East-West one, in particular the Balkans, (Romania and Albania). In this paper, with specific analysis carried out in regards to the foreigners in general and three mostly represented nationalities in Italy, it has been possible to identify, for some aspects, homogeneities and/or heterogeneities in the issue of demographic assets (population structure and territorial distribution) as well as socio-economic ones (school, work and detention).
_____________________
Stefania Girone, University of Bari, stefaniagirone@libero.it
Sabin Dragulin, University of Bucharest, dragulinsabin@yahoo.com
